Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Laughable argument. If she's that feeble she'd better quit now.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Less chance of KM speaking to Steve Clarke because someone who is not Steve Clarke has posted something on CL? If that is the case she really does play the victim to extremes!
Since both both SC and Rick were part of the G21 and now Rick is seemingly criticising KM for not having as much experience as SC and for not being brave enough to speak to SC it is hardly going to help it.
The olive branch is offered and is then promptly thrown in the dirt.
As I said I doubt Steve will find it helpful as it is yet another hurdle for him to overcome.
Which as I said is a real shame as I hoped and still hope there could be a reconciliation but that means both sides giving the other some credit.
Instead we've had suggestions that KM is playing the victim, should go back to being a lawyer and is hiding behind excuses.
Yes, that will encourage her to open the "meaningful dialogue" that I, and supposedly others, want, won't it.
Good interview and a lot of positives to come out of it, including speaking to certain fan groups in the summer.
"I will really try to work with the fans as much as possible. I said before there is a bit of a breach in trust towards certain (fan) groups but we will work on that in the summer and find a way to work together. We need the fans"
You have to establish trust before you can breach it.
Not a helpful comment, if KM is offering an olive branch.
I really meant this: the inference appears to be that she trusted said groups and they breached that trust. This is cobblers, as far as I can see.
If you take, for example, the current chair of the trust, she has spent 12 months refusing to engage with him, using a variety of excuses - the priority bring her personal fight against relegation, the need to do everything through the fans' forum, now apparently it is what some other bloke said on a train or what some other bloke shouted out in the street. Or perhaps daring to put on a public meeting that she couldn't control?
Yet she has never met Steve Clarke, who actually has more experience as a director of the club - and certainly a more extensive knowledge of it - than she does. So she has never established any trust to breach. She has simply hidden behind a stream of nonsensical excuses and continues to do so.
I suspect that what she really means is that she won't speak to anyone who criticises her or her boss - not breaches trust, but expresses their own opinion.
I know you meant it, that's the problem.
In the interests of building bridges, both sides have got to take a step back, accept that perhaps there were errors made on both sides and start again.
Continued sniping will definitely not achieve this and I myself have decided to take a step back and see how things pan out over the summer.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Less chance of KM speaking to Steve Clarke because someone who is not Steve Clarke has posted something on CL? If that is the case she really does play the victim to extremes!
Since both both SC and Rick were part of the G21 and now Rick is seemingly criticising KM for not having as much experience as SC and for not being brave enough to speak to SC it is hardly going to help it.
The olive branch is offered and is then promptly thrown in the dirt.
As I said I doubt Steve will find it helpful as it is yet another hurdle for him to overcome.
Which as I said is a real shame as I hoped and still hope there could be a reconciliation but that means both sides giving the other some credit.
Instead we've had suggestions that KM is playing the victim, should go back to being a lawyer and is hiding behind excuses.
Yes, that will encourage her to open the "meaningful dialogue" that I, and supposedly others, want, won't it.
So she won't engage with the Trust because the chair of the Trust knows a bloke who is not part of the Trust and said something she might not like, and she might not speak to the Trust cause I have said she is playing a victim even though I am nothing to do with the trust board? I am not a fan but still think I may give her more credit than you if you think she is that thin skinned! Apart from anything else, I think RD is probably pulling her strings to get out there and build bridges anyway.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Less chance of KM speaking to Steve Clarke because someone who is not Steve Clarke has posted something on CL? If that is the case she really does play the victim to extremes!
Since both both SC and Rick were part of the G21 and now Rick is seemingly criticising KM for not having as much experience as SC and for not being brave enough to speak to SC it is hardly going to help it.
The olive branch is offered and is then promptly thrown in the dirt.
As I said I doubt Steve will find it helpful as it is yet another hurdle for him to overcome.
Which as I said is a real shame as I hoped and still hope there could be a reconciliation but that means both sides giving the other some credit.
Instead we've had suggestions that KM is playing the victim, should go back to being a lawyer and is hiding behind excuses.
Yes, that will encourage her to open the "meaningful dialogue" that I, and supposedly others, want, won't it.
So she won't engage with the Trust because the chair of the Trust knows a bloke who is not part of the Trust and said something she might not like, and she might not speak to the Trust cause I have said she is playing a victim even though I am nothing to do with the trust board? I am not a fan but still think I may give her more credit than you if you think she is that thin skinned! Apart from anything else, I think RD is probably pulling her strings to get out there and build bridges anyway.
"Pulling her strings", there is a punchline methinks.
Come on guys, behave. None of this crap will help.
So true.
100% agree The relationship between the club and the Trust leadership does not need to be negotiated in public. I could say more, a lot,lot more but it won't help in any way. People either want the supporters Trust working with the club or they don't.
As someone who has negotiated a relationship between club and supporters Trust I can state it's not simple and you can't please all the people all of the time. I seem to recall we came in for dogs abuse from some but perhaps they lacked the understanding or vision to see what we were doing.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Well, they definitely met at last Thursday's FF meeting , where Steve was present representing the Trust.
And were talking seriously together when the rest of us took our leave.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Well, they definitely met at last Thursday's FF meeting , where Steve was present representing the Trust.
And were talking seriously together when the rest of us took our leave.
I heard this on Friday, and good to hear a reliable source confirm it !
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Well, they definitely met at last Thursday's FF meeting , where Steve was present representing the Trust.
And were talking seriously together when the rest of us took our leave.
So there was a Fans Forum meeting last Thursday? I can't remember that being advertised on here on in the Trust news? Did I miss this?
Will there be any feedback on this? It would be interesting to see what the agenda was?
Is SC on the FF because he's Trust chair? I've not heard anything from him since he's taken on this role - indeed the only article I can remember was when he was 'elected' to the Chair a week before Barnie announced his resignation.
I can't believe the complaints of the owner not willing to talk to the fans, when we've heard feck all from the new Trust Chair.
Katrien and co probably didn't appreciate the extent of the decay arising from the underinvestment of previous regimes. The pitch was an embarrassment though assisting survival 2013/14. Roland has spent £1m on a new surface, revamped catering and published plans to upgrade Sparrows Lane. Football supporters especially of clubs like Charlton admittedly bruised by experience should be careful what they wish for. Screaming blue murder at the CEO on the train from Watford out of order. Duchatelet has owned this great club just 15 months. We're surviving another year in the toughest feeder league on the planet. I think at least 85% of us would agree the current set up is a vast improvement on Jimenez and Slater. We have a good manager, a decent squad, an excellent academy so if the executive continue to raise their game on the PR front we may just have half a chance in future campaigns.
It doesn't really matter who thinks what at an individual level. The fact is, she is the CEO and her role is to do whatever is best for the club. That means uniting the ship, including the supporters. She shouldn't be able to afford to pick and choose which supporters groups she engages with just because some are more critical of her leadership than others. If we hadn't thrown double-six with Guy Luzon's winning streak, she would be in a very uncomfortable position today. Form is temporary and we have yet to see the end-of-season risk of balancing the books which could mean she has to preside over some very difficult decisions which could mean we take several steps backwards. She should have been big enough to grasp the nettle, listen to another viewpoint and deal with it. I have no doubt that some conciliatory words and some reassurances are all that is required. Her point-blank refusal confirms for some their view that she cannot give any of the reassurances about the club's direction and future and, as a result, we remain in a network model that is designed to generate revenue through players sales or benefit bigger clubs in the network at the expense of any serious ambition and cost to get promoted.
It doesn't really matter who thinks what at an individual level. The fact is, she is the CEO and her role is to do whatever is best for the club. That means uniting the ship, including the supporters. She shouldn't be able to afford to pick and choose which supporters groups she engages with just because some are more critical of her leadership than others. If we hadn't thrown double-six with Guy Luzon's winning streak, she would be in a very uncomfortable position today. Form is temporary and we have yet to see the end-of-season risk of balancing the books which could mean she has to preside over some very difficult decisions which could mean we take several steps backwards. She should have been big enough to grasp the nettle, listen to another viewpoint and deal with it. I have no doubt that some conciliatory words and some reassurances are all that is required. Her point-blank refusal confirms for some their view that she cannot give any of the reassurances about the club's direction and future and, as a result, we remain in a network model that is designed to generate revenue through players sales or benefit bigger clubs in the network at the expense of any serious ambition and cost to get promoted.
She shouldn't be able to afford to pick and choose which supporters groups she engages with just because some are more critical of her leadership than others. ......... Her point-blank refusal .
Yet she was talking to the Trust and a large number of other groups only last week as FF states above. It's not her who is "picking and choosing". She has said she wants to speak to all the groups not just one and that is what she is doing.
Steve Clarke attends the FF meeting and gets to speak to her 1-2-1 afterwards and so she's not making a "point blank refusal".
Which just underlines the point made by me and others that friends of Steve and Trust activists, who were so quick to jump on this latest article on this thread, might be better to give SC and KM some space to build a new and better relationship and so repair the damage done before Steve became Chair.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Good and relevant post. I am not sure what the Trust are doing at the moment but rightly or wrongly they have a rebuilding or building of trust exercise to do with the regime if they wish to have any chance of meeting their objectives.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Good and relevant post. I am not sure what the tryst are doing at the moment but rightly or wrongly they have a rebuilding or building of trust exercise to do with the regime if they wish to have any chance of meeting their objectives.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Laughable argument. If she's that feeble she'd better quit now.
And so it goes on.
She is "feeble". She "better quit now"
And we wonder why she isn't rushing to ring you and those that are aligned with you for help and advice.
If you really want a "meaningful dialogue" then you are going about it in a very strange way.
It is almost as if you don't want her to talk to Steve Clarke as that might kill your fox.
She shouldn't be able to afford to pick and choose which supporters groups she engages with just because some are more critical of her leadership than others. ......... Her point-blank refusal .
Yet she was talking to the Trust and a large number of other groups only last week as FF states above. It's not her who is "picking and choosing". She has said she wants to speak to all the groups not just one and that is what she is doing.
Steve Clarke attends the FF meeting and gets to speak to her 1-2-1 afterwards and so she's not making a "point blank refusal".
Which just underlines the point made by me and others that friends of Steve and Trust activists, who were so quick to jump on this latest article on this thread, might be better to give SC and KM some space to build a new and better relationship and so repair the damage done before Steve became Chair.
This makes a lot of sense to me .. allow SC and KM to mend the fences
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Laughable argument. If she's that feeble she'd better quit now.
And so it goes on.
She is "feeble". She "better quit now"
And we wonder why she isn't rushing to ring you and those that are aligned with you for help and advice.
If you really want a "meaningful dialogue" then you are going about it in a very strange way.
It is almost as if you don't want her to talk to Steve Clarke as that might kill your fox.
Just perhaps he was hoping to play the "I'm the new guy so let's move on from the many mistakes made both sides in the past and work on rebuilding some trust and a constructive relationship".
Less chance of that happening now IMHO.
A real shame.
Laughable argument. If she's that feeble she'd better quit now.
And again, Airman applying for the job via the back door.
I watch 'respected' individuals on this board measure their respective penises over their respective approach to club politics and cringe. The amount of ego involved in the Trust saga is unbearable. It's the usual national politics tale retold at club level. Embarrassment.
The thing is that the people on this message board, whatever side of the fence they sit on, care for this club a damn sight more than the b******* running it. They're only in it for the money.
All this tripe from Meire mentioning her support and love blah blah blah of Charlton Athletic, what a load of rubbish. She probably never heard of us until eighteen months ago.
Once she goes you will not see her backside in a seat at The Valley ever again.
Comments
The olive branch is offered and is then promptly thrown in the dirt.
As I said I doubt Steve will find it helpful as it is yet another hurdle for him to overcome.
Which as I said is a real shame as I hoped and still hope there could be a reconciliation but that means both sides giving the other some credit.
Instead we've had suggestions that KM is playing the victim, should go back to being a lawyer and is hiding behind excuses.
Yes, that will encourage her to open the "meaningful dialogue" that I, and supposedly others, want, won't it.
In the interests of building bridges, both sides have got to take a step back, accept that perhaps there were errors made on both sides and start again.
Continued sniping will definitely not achieve this and I myself have decided to take a step back and see how things pan out over the summer.
A ceasefire is needed.
The relationship between the club and the Trust leadership does not need to be negotiated in public. I could say more, a lot,lot more but it won't help in any way. People either want the supporters Trust working with the club or they don't.
As someone who has negotiated a relationship between club and supporters Trust I can state it's not simple and you can't please all the people all of the time. I seem to recall we came in for dogs abuse from some but perhaps they lacked the understanding or vision to see what we were doing.
And were talking seriously together when the rest of us took our leave.
Will there be any feedback on this? It would be interesting to see what the agenda was?
Is SC on the FF because he's Trust chair? I've not heard anything from him since he's taken on this role - indeed the only article I can remember was when he was 'elected' to the Chair a week before Barnie announced his resignation.
I can't believe the complaints of the owner not willing to talk to the fans, when we've heard feck all from the new Trust Chair.
The pitch was an embarrassment though assisting survival 2013/14. Roland has spent £1m on a new surface, revamped catering and published plans to upgrade Sparrows Lane.
Football supporters especially of clubs like Charlton admittedly bruised by experience should be careful what they wish for. Screaming blue murder at the CEO on the train from Watford out of order.
Duchatelet has owned this great club just 15 months. We're surviving another year in the toughest feeder league on the planet.
I think at least 85% of us would agree the current set up is a vast improvement on Jimenez and Slater.
We have a good manager, a decent squad, an excellent academy so if the executive continue to raise their game on the PR front we may just have half a chance in future campaigns.
Steve Clarke attends the FF meeting and gets to speak to her 1-2-1 afterwards and so she's not making a "point blank refusal".
Which just underlines the point made by me and others that friends of Steve and Trust activists, who were so quick to jump on this latest article on this thread, might be better to give SC and KM some space to build a new and better relationship and so repair the damage done before Steve became Chair.
And so it goes on.
She is "feeble". She "better quit now"
And we wonder why she isn't rushing to ring you and those that are aligned with you for help and advice.
If you really want a "meaningful dialogue" then you are going about it in a very strange way.
It is almost as if you don't want her to talk to Steve Clarke as that might kill your fox.
All this tripe from Meire mentioning her support and love blah blah blah of Charlton Athletic, what a load of rubbish. She probably never heard of us until eighteen months ago.
Once she goes you will not see her backside in a seat at The Valley ever again.
Rant over, I'm off to see Elfsborg v Djurgarden.
The pre-season target was to stay up and do better than last season.
This has been achieved and the club is moving forward. The ownership is settled and large sums of money have been invested.
It's pointless to keep on going over old ground. It is sad that redundancies had to be made but these things happen.
Look ahead.